Postings to this blog

I am receiving too many contributions and too many long contributions. At this time of heightened emotions on both sides of the EU argument I also do not wish to encourage personal abuse and embittered language and accusations.

I will therefore be deleting more contributions if they contain aggressive language, personal allegations and the like, even if they also contain some good points. I will also delete more repetitious and inaccurate submissions.

Comparisons with Hitler and the Nazis are rarely helpful or appropriate, and the language of violence and punishment not normally desirable in a strong exchange of democratic opinions.

As posters know, anything submitted to this site is submitted to be published here, with the names and identifiers sent in also appearing . I do not know if someone is using their own name or an assumed name and if two people post using the same name I do not adjudicate as to whether they can both use their chosen name. As posters here wish to talk to each other on this site I suggest they show each other some courtesy.

If two people write in as Superman with different views it would simplify life if one would use Superman1 or some other descriptor to differentiate. If two Sue Smiths write in it would be helpful if one wrote in as Sue Smith of Lancaster and one as Sue Smith of York or whatever. This is something people wishing to share the same online website should work out for their mutual advantage.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

95 Comments

I don’t think Boris calling the MP’s bill to instruct him to surrender a ‘surrender bill’ is offensive. It’s just accurate description. The MPs whinging yesterday were a disgrace to the country. The AG was accurate too. They are turkeys putting off Christmas.

I agree, and their words were far less inflammatory and more fitting than the ‘B’ word used by one former Conservative Prime Minister who resented his own MPs stance on the EU and the Maastricht Treaty. He expected them to be in his own limp lettuce image and meekly give away this nation’s sovereignty without question. He was mistaken. Had he given the nation a vote on the Maastricht Treaty’s acceptance and ratification in a referendum, this would be history and the UK would probably be out already.

So when it comes to intemperate language, Major set a precedent which I have followed ever since in describing those like him who constantly deny the people their democratic right. I let them know my displeasure quite vehemently and in a way parliament would not accept, and needless to say this site too. But we do need to get the message across how angry people are.

Perfectly understand your comments, I have not to my knowledge taken the bait and used any offensive language.

I have on occasion made more that one post a day in response to some postings, but on the whole I simply ignore the more extremist views of some.

Many of my postings in the last few months, even very very short ones, seem to have been held in moderation for at least 12 hours, even those as short as “I agree” but I accept its your site, you have other things to do, and you make the rules.

Many thanks for sharing your views on a daily basis, and allowing a response.

I am quite surprised that the EU and its 27 constituent member states are now implicitly defined as enemies of the UK by Prime Minister Boris Johnson. It is quite insulting actually.

The use of this word “surrender” is of course no accident. Dominic Cummings is far too smart a political operator for this to be an unfortunate turn of phrase.

This word is calibrated to subtly call-back to WW2 and appeal to the jingoism of a small subset of the British population which voted Leave.

I guess the aim is to energise them by reframing the current negotiation that sees the UK leave Europe as a rematch of plucky Brexiter Britain standing all alone against evil German Nazi led EU.

If it is indeed the case and that we are in WW2 analogy territory, may I respectfully point out that I really do not see Winston Churchill penning two essays over the week-end, one called “we will fight them on the beach” and the other “ let’s welcome our German overlords” before choosing which one would benefit his political career the most…

… just so that there be no confusion as to the quality of the political personnel here and then.

Thought you would be busy learning German . After all you told us as a FACT that all the jobs in the city ( including yours ) would be moving to Frankfurt . Hows that going by the way?

You dont seem to be able to substantiate any of the FACTS you have claimed repeatedly on this forum. Might pay you to actually get something right first dont you think. Managed to open an office in Europe yet? Three years you’ve been trying now apparently..

It is in their interests to have some free trade agreement with the UK as they export more to use than the reverse. The bureaucrats are not even acting in the interest of the EU members. This as they fear other of the more sensible EU countries will follow us.

The UK has now signed 44 trade agreements and 2 of the 3 biggest markets in the world have indicated strongly that they are also willing to do the same . So these friends we are losing are who exactly?

By the way every Ultra Remainer tells us that the EU is a trade bloc only. So when we use the indisputable facts about trade , which is WE BUY FAR MORE from them than they buy from us and therefore its in THEIR interests to do a deal to come onto a forum and call your biggest customer arrogant strikes me as pretty bad business

Offering free trade to Canada and South Korea, who have never paid a brass farthing into the EU’s coffers, and not immediately offering just as good an FTA to a country that has subsidised the EU to the tune of hundreds of billions of pounds, is downright unfriendly.

France still owns a small island just off the Canadian coast (about 25km), while not a land border the French did try to claim a 200 mile exclusive economic zone under maritime law in the 1980’s to gain access to resources including the Grand Banks

‘If they were friends they would offer a sensible and fair trade deal, not the putrid May’s W/A expensive handcuffs’

– are you friends to Europe (or do you come across as hostile to them)?

1. The UK voted to join the EEC
2. The EU has made many concessions to the UK over the decades
3. The EU is scared of the UK unravelling the EU and the chaos that could ensue (including chaos for the UK).

YES, let’s leave the EU (and before Jan 2020 by latest), but let’s keep things balanced and fair-minded, and not binary and trying to demonise people both abroad and at home.

If Sovereignty is an honourable thing (which I strongly believe it is), then we have to act with honour towards Europe, to EVERYONE at HOME, and for the sake of everyone at home – NOW, and for what children will read in their history books in the FUTURE, 50 or a 100 years from now.

(Otherwise children will say, ‘Why act dishonourably over something you believe is honourable’ – like asking, why lie to preserve truth? Or why undermine the spirit of Magna Carta to preserve Magna Carta?)

(Again, Sovereignty is an honourable thing, but the quest to gain it has often been riddled with moral self-contradictions that don’t only undermine the quest itself but also brings dishonour to the country as well as making us appear foolish to foreigners as well as to future generations here at home).

As it stands the current position in law is that we exit the EU on 31st October and trade freely on WTO terms.

The Benn act ( with the Kinnock amendment) has not been enforced yet.

I have a genuine question to ask you and Martin & Margaret ( not interested in the other remainers opinions)

WHY does the EU want the UK to remain in the EU? We have opposed the Euro, Schengen, and further Federal integration. I would have thought that it was in the interests of the EU to have us outside the club so that they can concentrate on achieving the aims set out in Maastricht & Lisbon treaties.

At the moment the EU looks like East Germany to the rest of the world. Proclaiming itself a workers paradise but using every trick in the book to stop people leaving. Most odd behaviour

If EU is empowered to dictate the length of any extension or terms under which such an extension were to be offered, and the UK are already mandated to accept the length of any such extension offered and any other terms dictated by the EU – then we have relinquished certain powers to the EU who are our opponents in the current negotiation.

I see no useful purpose in trying to differentiate this from a surrender.

The EU is NOT empowered to dictate the length of any extension. The Act means Boris has to ask for extension until January. The EU can say yes or no. The EU can also offer a longer or shorter extension and the UK then can say yes or no. “Surrender” is completely the wrong word, it’s just rabblerousing . Don’t join the rabble

Don’t call people that disagree with you a ‘rabble’ Helena that’s not how being pleasant to each other is meant to work and I take offence at your comment, I have never in my life been part of a disorderly crowd; or a mob, that’s more of a left-wing thing to do.

People can call May’s withdrawal agreement a surrender document because we happened to agree with the ex Greek PM that first said it was an agreement only a nation defeated in war would sign. We can choose what we believe or don’t believe and don’t need you to tell us how to behave.

Kicking this can of worms further down the road and putting us into another four months of limbo is not good. It’s going to affect pre-Christmas trade, holiday bookings for 2020, vehicle orders for March 2020 and will continue to.

3Duties in connection with Article 50 extension
(1)If the European Council decides to agree an extension of the period in Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union ending at 11.00 pm on 31 October 2019 to the period ending at 11.00pm on 31 January 2020, the Prime Minister must, immediately after such a decision is made, notify the President of the European Council that the United Kingdom agrees to the proposed extension.
(2)If the European Council decides to agree an extension of the period in Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union ending at 11.00pm on 31 October 2019, but to a date other than 11.00pm on 31 January 2020, the Prime Minister must, within a period of two days beginning with the end of the day on which the European Council’s decision is made, or before the end of 30 October 2019, whichever is sooner, notify the President of the European Council that the United Kingdom agrees to the proposed extension.

(3)But subsection (2) does not apply if the House of Commons has decided not to pass a motion moved by a Minister of the Crown within a period of two calendar days beginning with the end of the day on which the European Council’s decision is made or before the end of 30 October 2019, whichever is sooner, in the following form—
“That this House has approved the extension to the period in Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union which the European Council has decided.”

(4)Nothing in this section shall prevent the Prime Minister from agreeing to an extension of the period specified in Article 50(3) of the Treaty on European Union otherwise than in accordance with this section.

So, if the EU offers (say) a 99 year extension, and the offer is received on Friday night, then in order for this not to be accepted, the House of Commons would need to meet on Saturday or Sunday (likely?) and vote not to accept this extension (likely?).

Tabulazero
You have just illustrated Sir John’s point perfectly, with a comment far too long and saying nothing either erudite or of interest. It’s this sort of thing that wastes his time. Your comments would waste mine too – but when I see your name I usually skip over them.
We’re fortunate to have such a common-sense blog to read amid the all the mainstream mania. Long may Sir John consider it’s worth continuing.

If you are right in what you say – and you may indeed have a point – it begs the question, Why was this particular post so swiftly approved? It has certainly provoked your response as well as many others.

Our ‘friends’ in the Commission seemed to think that the treaty that they wrote, with the approval of our civil servants, was ‘colonialisation’. With friends like this, who needs enemies to surrender to. I apologise if the c word is offensivein any way to Remainers.

Don’t see the big problem with ‘surrender’ – it’s puritanical to suggest none of us embellish our language (I do).

But there’s a major difference between ‘surrender’ and ‘betray’ (sometimes, we have to ‘surrender’ – like at Dunkirk). But ‘betray’ is quite different. Betrayal is level with treason. In the old days, you’d have to reveal your identity if you accused someone of treason, so that the other person could defend their honour in a duel or through the courts. But if identity hidden, then the accusation would be considered cowardly and an insult to the honour of one’s country to use such a word in such a way.

Or if identity known, then betrayal can only be used if backed up the courts. To use the word more casually than this is an insult to the honour that true loyalty and patriotism signifies (like those brave British men and women who risked their lives during WW2 for example).

Fighting for sovereignty is an honourable thing, but it mustn’t undermine other things that are honourable as well, our Monarchy, Courts – above all, our people, whoever they are, whether Leaver or Remainer.

Therefore, it would have been honorable if Government/Parliament had supported the request of the people in executing the Democratic decision of the people…..as would be the case after a General Election….

….but look where we are today, due, in the main, to individuals in Parliament and the Executive ignoring the will of the people! Why is that Ed M?

If one boils down this whole debacle, it is because the Government did not do as the people asked!. The rest is just background noise to deflect away from the original wrong.

Okay, but stick to it. Otherwise within a week we will have multiple responses combined with those from the dark side of the moon. That our reactions tend to be more in line with the Attorney General when faced with some of the idiocy and outright lies one reads in this diary is not surprising, but not having the advantage of parliamentary privilege I will try to keep the obscenities of WW2 out of my comments.

My efforts are expressed in an ornate courtly manner, a stylistic grace note here, an elegant aphorism there…..and yet I am cruelly ignored . I cannot imagine why ?
Can we please return to the tale non-existent negotiations ? Do continue, we are gathered around the armchair expectantly…
…..and then Sir Boris stopped and kissed the Deal which lay sleeping and it yawned and stretched and looked just like Theresa May .. which made all the Brexit goblins cross and they said Boris can`t be a prince any more ……..

All the city jobs are going to Frankfurt and that other children classic, there will be 500,000 job losses or maybe the car industry will all be leaving UK and 9,000 skilled automotive engineering jobs lost? Or Siemens say they are leaving the UK?

ps British commercial vehicle manufacturing output surged by 47.9% in August as 5,544 units rolled off production lines, nearly 1,800 more than in the same period last year

Thank you for posting this. I would love to see more respectful comments on this site, and a lot more open-mindedness. There are some commenters who seem to listen to the viewpoints of others, who are genuinely interested in exploring the nuance and subtlety. But there are others who come here merely to announce the facts as they see them, and insult those who disagree with them. These people are not going to change any minds – they just make themselves look a bit silly, really.

It’s no surprise that there are so many of the latter – after all, that seems to be the example being set by the majority of our media and MPs. But to all here, I say – try to be better.

Resorting to abuse should be ignored: it means that you are either incapable of forming a decent argument or you know that your case is poor.
On the other hand, neither Cox nor Johnson said anything abusive, on the other hand, the ensuing self-righteous indignation was brandished by politicians who clearly have no self-awareness.
Thanks for blogging at a busy time.

Though I already see words like ‘idiocy’, ‘outright lies’, ‘disrace’, ‘drivel’, ‘putrid’ being used in response to your post. It seems people aren’t getting the message.

Also, just to reply to J C Junker’s point about me being a false flag remainer, I can only repeat I want to leave the E.U and voted for it.

Just because I happen to believe the withdrawal agreement is the only sensible way of doing it, it doesn’t make me the enemy. I could be equally hostile against the so called Spartans or No Dealers, who I blame for stopping Brexit. Indeed, had parliament actually voted for the withdrawal agreement, we would have left months ago – rather than imperilling the entire project, as we appear to be doing.

Agreed so we can here any sound positives why on earth we should remain in an unreformable non-listening economic straitjacket EU. I can !listen to Ode to joy on a CD and their EU flags remind me of China (but) blue.
I skip lots of lengthy comments after the first few lines as it’s often a rant or therapy dump with no new positive ideas.
Thank you Sir for your efforts to inform without fear standing up for ordinary people despite the nonsense.

Sir John as a constituent of yours I am proud to be such a privileged individual. I agree that There is no need for vitriol and animosity toward people who have a different opinion, it is not an English trait that I was brought up to believe. Everyone is entitled to their opinion (however wrong they may be).

As ever, sensible comments from you – particularly about the names of those submitting. e.g. we know who Andy is, but the other Andy should differentiate so that his comments are not simply ignored by the majority.

I really do not know how, with all your other commitments, you keep on top of this blog. It is a most valuable source of opinion and I, for one, am most grateful to you.

Remoaners would gain some respect if they showed an ounce of originality! But that is the EU for you, not only does it want to suppress individual Nation States, it also wants to suppress the Individual!
It will no rest until the peoples of the EU are robotic zombies uttering what passes for conversation from a narrow bland vocabulary!

I see Sky News is challenging the BBC for the UK’s chief EU grovelling news outlet! It currently has a backdrop saying ‘Brexit Crisis’ against a background of blue and yellow – no sight anywhere of the Union Flag! Also, their OBs from College Green always have remoaners in shot, waving that awful apology for a flag!

The recent decision of The Supreme Court was referenced by itself to specific noted instances
in literature written in the 1600s. So too, decisions by our Remainer Parliament.
In what ways have both any idea whatsoever in the slightest degree of the particular contexts in which those texts were written and the purposes for which they were written and in deed if they were in fact written at the date and time on the tin? Answer NONE that bears linguistic scrutiny

Fair enough, Sir John. But you must realise that these threads offer your correspondents a much needed vent for very strong feelings indeed; and you will, perhaps, agree that much has unfortunately been done to provoke such feelings. Of course, good argument is key – but it has to address the public as they are. And when they are angry, the great orator will express that anger, although only the demagogue will seek to increase it or turn towards violence. Fail to orate, however, and you give the demagogues their chance. I hope this is not too long.

This issue is upsetting a lot of us, mainly we just want it done and finished.
There are children in care in this country who feel safer sleeping on the streets than in the care home because of the threat of violence. There is a massive crisis in knife crime on our streets, but MPs are more concerned for their own personal safety.
Being as obnoxious and rude as the script of a soap opera (Eastenders) seems to be fashionable. I blame the BBC.

As has been said many times before, Alan, the party in question is neither liberal nor democratic! In fact, they should be officially re-named ‘The Illiberal Nondems!’ – Whatever happened to the ‘Trades’ Description Act?’

Also, can you imagine the uproar if Brexiteers wore T-shirts with “B******s to the EU” on them?

The stark fact is: There are too many people in our country, and worldwide, who wake up in the morning with the sole reason for their existence being to actively seek to be offended! – Invariably, it is contrived, or fake indignation!

Just hold the Trolls in moderation until the next day. Most of the posts are responses to them. When I see their names I just scroll, and scroll, and scroll past all the posts after them. You will be amazed at the number ! Sometimes it can be a third of a way down a page until I get to the first unique poster. And some people wonder why I complain ?

The problem with vague reprimands John is that everyone thinks they are innocent and its other parties that are at fault. I don’t take this approach with employees because all of the decent good colleagues get really cross with blanket telling offs and prefer I deal with culprits individually. Perhaps you could ask your blog creator if you could just have a ‘repudiate’ button that lets the person posting know their post has been deemed unworthy (you don’t need to give reasons – it’s your blog share what you wish) instead of just ‘in moderation’.

In the past week we have seen bleaters in the House of Commons decrying “offensive language” by their opponents, which is simply a try-on to prevent democracy and impose their repugnant exaggerations of political correctness upon us.
They forget that democracy is “people power” and that the “sovereignty of parliament” is only by permission of the electorate.
In no way should such behaviour be conflated with conversation on Sir John’s blog, or what he requests here, because, of all the MPs in the lower house, it should be obvious to all that he is one of the most elegant, reasonable, least given to hysteria or hyperbole, and respectful members.
If all members could respect his code of honour, I could certainly live with that.

For three years the abusive language has come from Remain and I invite readers to read the archives of this blog for proof. This is replicated in day to day life.

Leavers are called ‘racists’. It is a crime to be racist, prosecuted with more vigour than child sex offences and with greater stigma. Leavers are called stupid, which is fighting talk in any era, yet we are not credited with turning the other cheek and this in addition our vote being ignored because of it.

It strikes me as odd that the Remainers in Parliament are happy with a foul-mouthed slogan from the Lib Dems regarding Brexit and yet clutch their pearls when Boris says “humbug”, a word of almost Dickensian quaintness.

Sir John – what you “should” be doing is, starting from Mays BRINO WA, edit all the points that are unacceptable, and substitute what is acceptable. Then translate it into however many EU languages there are, and present it to the EU Council, and simultaneously every internet, media outlet in Europe, so that the citizens can see the reasonableness of what is proposed, and invite the EU to either accept it, or take ALL the blame for the “No Deal” consequences their intransigence will impose on everyone – especially Eire, who will chuck out their “PM” the next day.

Noting that you have deleted some of mine (not that I take it personally – it’s your site after all) I offer my view that perhaps part of the problem with general tone on here is caused by the presence of left wing remain minded people, who appear to be on a vicious offensive against the referendum result.

The fact that you ‘appear’ to be allowing their vitriol but deleting our responses does not, in my opinion bode well.

Might I suggest you clarify whether this site is predominantly a remain or leave oriented ?

If the former then fair do’s we can go somewhere else, if the latter then why you allow these left wingers to come on here with their ‘smash the evil tories ‘ bile is a mystery. They should be the ones moderated out.

About John Redwood

John Redwood won a free place at Kent College, Canterbury, and graduated from Magdalen College Oxford. He is a Distinguished fellow of All Souls, Oxford. A businessman by background, he has set up an investment management business, was both executive and non executive chairman of a quoted industrial PLC, and chaired a manufacturing company with factories in Birmingham, Chicago, India and China. He is the MP for Wokingham, first elected in 1987.